2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

Again, this is my review of my truck. I don't know what you guys are talking about. My 2002 Tundra is great, as I said in the review. For me, this was not intended to start some fight of Japanese vs American. I love my Tundra. And I love my wife's Windstar too. Who cares where they are made. A good vehicle is a good vehicle, no matter who makes it.

11:04 The latest report is exactly that (RECENT); again what you had 5 or more years ago is irrelevant. It's thousands of most recent ownership. Again an import is in first place, Honda 3, Toyota 5.

I agree with what works, have a domestic and an import, it's your money. I also agree go by applications... the 2002 Tundra owner might have a light applications, but others need a heavier duty truck for towing and loads. Where are Toyotas 3/4 ton and above for example?

Each of us has our own applications and budget. I would not accept a lousy warranty; at least pay for an aftermarket warranty, even with a deductible. I wish I did that on my last Honda. The newest ones are not non problematic we found.

Sorry, but it's all too easy just to automatically assume that such a slanted title as "No more GM" is written either by am import sales person or import fanatic. You've been extremely fortunate to have owned an older Tundra that has made it this long without a major repair. Most of our friends who own older Tundras have been nowhere near as lucky. Even Consumer Reports no longer recommends Tundra. Consider yourself very lucky to have gotten one of the few good ones. I'm a mechanic and I'd feel safer in a 1980 Yugo than in any recent Toyota product.

I have NEVER said that newer imports are worse than older ones. All the imports we owned were built in the 80's and early 90's. Not one of them was one iota better than any of our domestics from that same era.

The best, longest lasting car our family ever owned was a 1975 Ford. It was driven to work daily for 18 years and had well over 300,000 miles. No import our family ever owned went that far. I definitely don't buy the "imports have gotten worse" line. They were crap 20 years ago too.

11:04 Right on. This is the experience that just about everyone has with Toyota's. They eventually gain the sense to switch from domestic crap to something much better, and buy Toyota's or Honda's, and are impressed.

Just read that GM is closing a bunch or a few truck plants. While I feel bad for the workers, this is the position that GM has created for itself. If you continue to sell people junk, eventually all of the slick advertising fails to work, people realize that they bought junk, and switch to something better.

Toyota is opening plants here in the U.S. and GM is closing them down. As it should be. Each is reaping what they sow.

This is becoming a pointless argument. The fact is that GM and Ford are shutting their large truck and SUV plants down. It would seem to me that any company forced into making drastic changes in their lineup such as a shift away from full size trucks would invest more into such an appropriate vehicle. As of now, The Ford Ranger, which was never updated from it's 1992 redesign is no longer produced. Thus Ford doesn't have a small or ever mid-sized truck to compete with. GM has the Colorado, which is about the most gutless, old-fashioned, shoddily constructed small truck I've ever driven. Once again, these domestic manufacturers screwed up royally by not having a sufficient product to get them by during lean times.

Meanwhile, the only manufacture that has anything remotely acceptable in the form of a smaller truck and in many automotive journalist's superior is the Tacoma, which is light years ahead of anything spewing out of GM plants, which as mentioned in the news, will be less of.

You all who swear by your "domestics" seem to be ignoring the writing on the wall, which is that GM and Ford's days are numbered. Soon it won't matter: import brands will be your only choice.

GM is closing plants due to slumping SUV and truck sales. They depend on those sales more than Toyota, so when the market is down they get affected more. Toyota isn't escaping the downfall either. Near where I live they are building a plant for Highlander trucks.. guess what? They're pushing back the opening date to 2010 due to slumping truck/SUV sales. They probably would stop building if they could, but hey if I invested tens of millions dollar into something, I would finish the project.

Again, 21:44 gives not a SHRED of evidence, documentation, or even personal experience with GM in his comment.

He also distorts the news of GM's truck plant "closings" into a pointless (and false) argument that it is because of poor build quality.

Ford, GM and Chrysler are ALL are SWITCHING some of their truck plants to build smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles due to the outrageous price of gas, NOT any lack of quality (companies that build poor quality vehicles DO NOT warranty them for 100,000 miles!!).

Ford is switching its Mexico plant from large trucks to the small and VERY fuel efficient Fiesta (which is not sold yet in the U.S.). Ford has also INCREASED production of the fuel efficient Focus by 30% to meet the INCREASED demand for them. Sales of the Focus were UP 23% last quarter. Even Toyota is delaying the opening of its Tupelo, Mississippi plant a year because of the weakened market and high gas prices.

Virtually EVERY automotive source is in full agreement that the new Camry, Tundra and Yaris are not very good cars and trucks. As another comment has so aptly pointed out, even the extremely biased publications are now forced by the overwhelming crop of FACTS to drop their recommendations of the Camry and Tundra

My title "no more GM" was from my frustration of owning a Chevy truck, I am not a salesperson or representative otherwise of any import company.

Like I said a few posts earlier, we have a Windstar, and we love it. I don't care where a vehicle is made. Good is good, bad is bad. The Chevy was a joke, the Tundra has served loyal for 6 plus years, as has the ford van.

It just so happens every vehicle in my past that made me want to pull my hair out in frustration was a GM. That's where the "no more Gm" came from. Ford- I would give another chance. GM - never will give them another chance.

You guys going on and on about how bad NEW tundras are... go post on the 2008. IF you own one and can speak from experience... which I doubt you can.

Tundra sales are down as well. Is it so far fetched to assume that the full size truck plants are due to high fuel costs? I guess you conveniently left that factor out its 100% quality but wait... What is more an illustration of quality is Toyotas current #5 satisfaction ranking with current owners. GM is number 2, VW again in number 1 spot.

Lets look at it another way; total sales are up for small fuel efficient cars... not many are willing to spend $85 or more per tank in their full size truck. I appreciate high quality, handling, room, towing capability; that's why I have a new Silverado with a better reliability rating in 2008 and far superior warranty. I'll spend more for gas as I am quality oriented and not price driven. But I do appreciate the plight of many families with mortgages, rising food costs, fuel expense; in fact everything seems to have gone up. Something has to give for many families, and either cutting driving way back or buying high mpg vehicles... sales of Tundras were never significant anyway compared to the big 3. Ford alone over 7 times as many Tundras trucks sold.

Are you commenting on small car sales being up over gas pricing again on a full size truck review? Did you drive a new Tundra and a full size GM truck yet? I picked up the difference in less than 5 minutes.

We can afford fuel for our current large GM SUV, but will not buy another large vehicle because we don't really need or want another one. That is the opinion of the HUGE number of people who are switching to smaller vehicles, NOT any perceived difference in build quality.

The number of ads for used large trucks and SUV's in our local newspaper has QUADRUPLED over the past few months. That includes a HUGE number of Highlanders, Tundras and Sequoias. The number of car ads has DECREASED.

More people are opting to keep their fuel-efficient cars and sell their larger vehicles. We do not pull a trailer or have a large family, and we feel that our GM compact rides as well and drives better than our SUV, so we will, when the time comes to trade, buy another small vehicle simply because it is more economical and sensible for us.

I think that is the reason smaller vehicles are selling well, not any difference in quality. Everything I read tends to indicate that domestic vehicles are more reliable than imports, so we will most likely buy another GM.

Let's get some facts straight shall we? These "horrible" problems that you mention in regards to Toyota are for the following problems:

1: The V6, 6 speed Camry had - read again HAD a problem with a snap ring not being seated correctly, which in some cases caused the transmission to shift in a jerking fashion. The problem has already been corrected, yet you all act as if this happened yesterday.

2: The redesigned Tundra had an initial - yes INITIAL problem with 20,000 cams that were machined incorrectly from an American supplier - which I find somewhat ironic since these see-saw arguments seem to be heavily patriotic and nothing more. Again, this problem has been corrected.

Lastly, let's look at that report that seems to permeate every argument in regards to how "bad" toyota is. The latest JD power for June, 2008 report by brand is as follows:

1: Porsche

2: Infiniti (Nissan luxury brand)

3: Lexus (Toyota's luxury brand, some models based on the Camry)

4: Mercedes Benz

5: Toyota

6: Mercury

7: Honda

8: Ford

9: Jaguar

10: Audi

11: Cadillac

12: Chevrolet

13: Hyundai

14: Pontiac

15: Lincoln

And so on. Basically, Nissan, Toyota, and two upper end luxury cars made it to the top. Lexus is basically a Toyota with all the trimmings, so in reality, two of the top five were Toyota products. You have to scroll down to no.11 before you get to any GM brands. Mercury is admirably at no.6, but still below Toyota, and in reality, Mercury's offering include the Mariner and Montego-both heavily reliant on Mazda engines and platforms. So that easily explains their higher placement.

So the story isn't any different than it has been. Promises of better quality but nothing to show. Improved? Yes. Better? No.

The point of all of this is still that Toyota makes better cars, trucks, automobiles than the Big 3 ever did.

If Toyota and GM made toasters, the Toyota toaster would perform better and last longer than the GM toaster, for the same reason their automobiles do; they actually put time and effort into building an excellent product, and GM does not.

So are we buying a Tundra or high end Lexus? Small cars and small Tacomas are fuel efficient. Literally all small cars are selling well... domestic for and import. Since this is a full size truck review not Tacoma, Rangers etc what is the point? Small trucks do not fit any of the applications I must have... pointless to expect small cars and small trucks to meet applications. Why not discuss buses, bicycles, scooters and commuter trains for the debate on fuel pricing; it's not over quality, it's the strain on consumers... I see all manufacturers shifting to smaller fuel efficient vehicles.

Somehow the diehard import owner distorts facts. Are Land Cruisers with the V8 and the Tundras sales dramatically up lately? Don't think so. With the great quality, everyone should drive one and sell small cars and small Tacomas, and forget fuel gauges... high end import vehicles; why are their sales down now?

"The redesigned Tundra had an initial - yes INITIAL problem with 20,000 cams that were machined incorrectly from an American supplier - which I find somewhat ironic since these see-saw arguments seem to be heavily patriotic and nothing more."

Toyota never named the mysterious camshaft "supplier," if there even was one and we should take Toyota's word for anything. Thus, you have absolutely no basis to say where the (supposed) "supplier" was or was not located.

Furthermore, the problem was not due to incorrect machining, but was metallurgical - i.e., poor materials.

By the way, if an American manufacturer had that kind of a problem, would you be as forgiving?